Wed, 24 Oct 90 16:25:29 GMT

Related articles |
---|

IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic robertsj@admin.ogi.edu (John Roberts) (1990-10-22) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic burley@world.std.com (1990-10-24) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1990-10-24) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic tim@ksr.com (Tim Peters) (1990-10-24) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic dik@cwi.nl (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic wsb@eng.Sun.COM (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic eggert@twinsun.com (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic wsb@eng.Sun.COM (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic sjc@key.COM (1990-10-26) |

[4 later articles] |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.lang.fortran |

From: | henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) |

Keywords: | Fortran |

Organization: | U of Toronto Zoology |

References: | <9010230628.AA22160@admin.ogi.edu> |

Date: | Wed, 24 Oct 90 16:25:29 GMT |

*> [our moderator writes]*

*>... I know of no reason that an IEEE implementation of F77 would be*

*>nonconforming. ...*

I can think of at least one: F77 flatly denies the existence of -0,

while IEEE demands it. (One of Dr. Kahan's favorite examples in his

talks is an algorithm which, when implemented straightforwardly, does

the right thing if -0 is implemented properly and screws up bizarrely

if not, so yes, it does matter.)

--

Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology, henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry

[Given that +0 = -0, it's not clear to me that the existence of -0 breaks

anything. Keep in mind that F77 is a permissive standard, extensions are

permitted so long as conforming programs do the right thing. -John]

--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.